Star Trails Nightscape (Page 2): An eye-catcher, realized beautifully ✨💎✨💎✨...

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

JN56 wrote:

This past Sat conditions were good so I headed dow... (show quote)

An eye-catcher, realized beautifully ✨💎✨💎✨

JN56 Loc: Southern California

Iron Sight wrote:

"This past Sat conditions were good so I headed down to Borrego Springs CA to do some star trails"

That was a brilliant Idea!!!!! 👀
+ the Meta Data attached to the photo👍

Thanks so much, I really appreciate the kind words!

JN56 Loc: Southern California

joecichjr wrote:

An eye-catcher, realized beautifully ✨💎✨💎✨

Thank you very much...

JN56 Loc: Southern California

PoppieJ wrote:

looks like you exposed well as the colors show up in the stars. If you had over exposed they would only be bright white. And you don't have any satellites in the picture

Thanks you, actually I did have one I had to remove from one of the frames.

JN56 Loc: Southern California

Fstop12 wrote:

Very interesting foreground feature. I haven't done a star trail image in a long time. Mine usually consist of 30 sec expsures with a 1 sec pause between shots. I usually do a blue hour foreground image and then when it gets dark I try to get the stars as sharp as I can before starting the camera. My shoot usually lasts about 3 hours. In post I use Starstax to blend the star images and then I blend my blue hour foreground shot with the blended stars image.

Yes for me its important to have something eye catching in the foreground, not to take away from the stars but to compliment. I follow Richard Tatti nightscapeimages (Instagram), he demonstrated how good these can turn out simply shooting 10-12 / 3 min exposures with a low ISO like 640 and a aperture of f4 or smaller. So shooting time was only about 45 mins. I am going to try shooting more frames to see if I can get them a little tighter.

Terkat

Good morning JN56,

Beautiful. I just tried reversing the image so as to place Polaris to the right and, to me, it looks somewhat better (to me) with the principal object to the right and the darker sculpture to the left.
For some reason - which remains unknown to me to this day (73 years old) I feel an image (depending on content) should progress, either in brightness / intensity / subject being captured, from left to right.

All the best to you and yours,

Terry

JN56 Loc: Southern California

Terkat wrote:

Good morning JN56,

Beautiful. I just tried reversing the image so as to place Polaris to the right and, to me, it looks somewhat better (to me) with the principal object to the right and the darker sculpture to the left.
For some reason - which remains unknown to me to this day (73 years old) I feel an image (depending on content) should progress, either in brightness / intensity / subject being captured, from left to right.

All the best to you and yours,

Terry

Thanks Terry appreciate your comments and thoughts. Could it be as simple as our relationship to how we read (left to right) ?? We are so acclimated to panning in that direction. Who knows?? Thats the beautiful thing about photography and art, the different perspectives of the creator and the viewer. In my humble opinion both are correct!